<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (10) TMI 826 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368860</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit remained available on insurance premium paid for employees&#039; compensation insurance, public liability insurance, and related insurance services for the period after 1-4-2011. The exclusion introduced from that date was read as applying only to insurance primarily for personal use or consumption of employees, not to insurance obtained to meet statutory obligations or to support factory operations. Applying Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the Tribunal treated such insurance as input service because it was connected with employee welfare requirements and protection against manufacturing risks. Credit was therefore held admissible and denial of credit was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2018 09:43:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 826 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368860</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit remained available on insurance premium paid for employees&#039; compensation insurance, public liability insurance, and related insurance services for the period after 1-4-2011. The exclusion introduced from that date was read as applying only to insurance primarily for personal use or consumption of employees, not to insurance obtained to meet statutory obligations or to support factory operations. Applying Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the Tribunal treated such insurance as input service because it was connected with employee welfare requirements and protection against manufacturing risks. Credit was therefore held admissible and denial of credit was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368860</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>